Navigation

The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us.

Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help end theism, dogma, violence, hatred, and other irrationality. Buy an Xbox 360 -- PS3 -- Laptop -- Apple

I think you are refering to "I swear ..(to god)". I'm guessing. But "I swear....(to say the truth)" is not religious at all, it pre-dates all current religions by centuries. A person 'swore' to be truthful based on their reputations, their dignity, their testicles; [castrate me if I lie]. In small close knit societys your reputation was everything, or you can face ostrisism without one of your favorite body parts. Ancient Romans held their testicles and swore to tell the truth, today we still call it testimony.

There is nothing about the phrase "I swear" that necessitates a deity. Swearing oaths often involves invoking a deity, but it is not required.

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X

I think you are refering to "I swear ..(to god)". I'm guessing. But "I swear....(to say the truth)" is not religious at all, it pre-dates all current religions by centuries. A person 'swore' to be truthful based on their reputations, their dignity, their testicles; [castrate me if I lie]. In small close knit societys your reputation was everything, or you can face ostrisism without one of your favorite body parts. Ancient Romans held their testicles and swore to tell the truth, today we still call it testimony.

Reputation and religion sound like the same thing to me. I'm talking in the morally absolutist sense of God where people proclaim there's an absolute standard which cannot be breached no matter what.

Religion and reputation ARE NOT the same thing and never were. I have a reputation not based on any religion because I was never religious. Billy Graham has a reputation based on religion because all has has in life is religion. Adolph Hitler has a reputation NOT based on religion even though he was religious. I am not aware of any 'absolute standard' established by any human being that can not be 'breached' by another.

Religion and reputation ARE NOT the same thing and never were. I have a reputation not based on any religion because I was never religious. Billy Graham has a reputation based on religion because all has has in life is religion. Adolph Hitler has a reputation NOT based on religion even though he was religious. I am not aware of any 'absolute standard' established by any human being that can not be 'breached' by another.

I don't mean like that.

I mean swearing on your reputation is comparable to swearing to God. They're both morally absolutist standards which cannot be breached.

It's like saying both blue squares and green squares are squares. Both reputation and religion are moral absolutes.

Your reputation is what your are, based on how you conduct your life. Myself and millions of others have no religion; ergo how can you equate reputation with religion? How can any reputation be absolute. What my reputation is TODAY may change tomorrow; it depends on what I get caught at. So far I haven't been caught at anything that changes my current reputation.

Your reputation is what your are, based on how you conduct your life. Myself and millions of others have no religion; ergo how can you equate reputation with religion? How can any reputation be absolute. What my reputation is TODAY may change tomorrow; it depends on what I get caught at. So far I haven't been caught at anything that changes my current reputation.

When people swear, they're claiming that it's absolute because they're assuming the risk of their reputation becoming eternally damned.

If people say it and believe in it, then they're irrational over Pascal's wager in assuming the risk of eternal damnation just for momentary success.

Two things:

1) Assuming you're talking about saying "I swear to God", probably the biggest reason people brought up in a largely Christian society would do so is because of social conditioning and habit. It's basically a figure of speech. I still catch myself reflexively saying "bless you" when someone sneezes, born solely out of thirty years of habit.

2) Pascal's Wager only works like that if you assume the only two possibilities are that one specific god exists or no gods exist. Given that there is as much evidence for any one specific god as there is for any other, or for any that I literally make up right now, this is a foolish assumption. You have to account for all gods (all infinity of them), which makes the end result of Pascal's Wager completely impossible to determine.

On a related note:

The reason I still take God's name in vain (which is pretty much the same things as this topic) is because of a new found freedom on my part, and not due to a secret belief. For years, I'd find myself accidentally doing so and feeling guilty. Once I stopped believing, I no longer had to feel guilty, so regardless of whether or not I believe I'm actually offending an invisible person, I do so because I can, and it was so nice to get rid of all that guilt.

If people say it and believe in it, then they're irrational over Pascal's wager in assuming the risk of eternal damnation just for momentary success.

Two things:

1) Assuming you're talking about saying "I swear to God", probably the biggest reason people brought up in a largely Christian society would do so is because of social conditioning and habit. It's basically a figure of speech. I still catch myself reflexively saying "bless you" when someone sneezes, born solely out of thirty years of habit.

2) Pascal's Wager only works like that if you assume the only two possibilities are that one specific god exists or no gods exist. Given that there is as much evidence for any one specific god as there is for any other, or for any that I literally make up right now, this is a foolish assumption. You have to account for all gods (all infinity of them), which makes the end result of Pascal's Wager completely impossible to determine.

On a related note:

The reason I still take God's name in vain (which is pretty much the same things as this topic) is because of a new found freedom on my part, and not due to a secret belief. For years, I'd find myself accidentally doing so and feeling guilty. Once I stopped believing, I no longer had to feel guilty, so regardless of whether or not I believe I'm actually offending an invisible person, I do so because I can, and it was so nice to get rid of all that guilt.

A lot of times, still "bless you" out of habit. Otherwise, nothing. It feels weird to not say anything, but that's because it's what I'm used to. I could say "Gesundheit", but that's not that far off from saying "bless you".

For over 50 years [I'm 57] ; when someone sneezes I say, very loudly; "Hello...[...unto you], [...not gay but we can talk], [...cool it, my wife is here], [...mother wouldn't like that], [...REALLY, now I have to], [...my panties are NOT showing], it depends on who is sneezing and the situation. And/or the ever popular 'I made bail, how did you get here?'

For over 50 years [I'm 57] ; when someone sneezes I say, very loudly; "Hello...[...unto you], [...not gay but we can talk], [...cool it, my wife is here], [...mother wouldn't like that], [...REALLY, now I have to], [...my panties are NOT showing], it depends on who is sneezing and the situation. And/or the ever popular 'I made bail, how did you get here?'

"I swear" is an example of phatic language. it has no semantic content, or its semantic content is irrelevant, and thus any philosophical assertions one can make based on its (hypothetical) semantic content are irrelevant. its function is purely illocutionary.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson